Dharamsala, November 12
It is still not clear what happened on the fateful night of March 6, 2008, that eventually resulted in the death of the first year medical student Aman Satya Kachroo at the Rajendra Prasad Medical College at Tanda, 15 km from Dharamsala.The court of Additional Sessions Judge Purinder Vaidya was told that the “seniors” had arrived to discuss the “freshers’ party” and that the atmosphere was cordial. Students were “singing, dancing and sharing jokes”. But the court was also told that the seniors, who were all drunk, summoned all 22 first year students to the Common Room, where they were lined up, abused and assaulted. What happened there and why? The 43-page judgment delivered yesterday, sentencing four medical students to four years rigorous imprisonment, throws no light.
By all accounts, Aman received a slap but was allowed to go back to his room when he complained of a problem in his left ear. But the court was also told that he was re-summoned and asked why he had left the Common Room. After he repeated his alibi, he was first hit on the right side of his face, then on his chest and finally his head was banged against the wall. However, there was no external injury on his head and no mention in his written complaint made on March 8, 2009, that his head was banged against the wall.
The defence lawyer also pointed out that prosecution witnesses had admitted that while being taken to hospital, the head of the unconscious Aman had hit the floor. The 6-foot tall and well-built medical student was carried with difficulty down the stairs. Attempts were then made to make the unconscious boy sit on a motorcycle. When that attempt failed, a car was summoned to shift him to hospital. During this exercise, the court was told, Aman’s head hit the floor.
These are just some curious ‘facts’ and contradictions that weakened the prosecution’s case against the four accused. The court was constrained to note that the prosecution had failed to establish the motive and intent to kill. It agreed that there was no reason to disbelieve the statements of eight first year students examined by the prosecution and held the accused guilty of using “criminal force” and committing culpable homicide with no intention to kill. The evidence was contradictory enough to persuade the court that the accused did the deserve the maximum possible sentence — 10 years.
The prosecution’s ‘weak’ case, however, successfully exposed the poor administration of the college. The security guard at the hostel claimed to have resisted the entry of senior students into the hostel at 2 am but there is no explanation why he did not immediately inform the hostel warden or the hostel manager. The hostel manager apparently learnt of the incident at 3.45 pm on March 8 although the ragging had taken place between 2 am and 4.30 am on March 7.
The warden learnt of the ragging incident from the principal! And as if this were not bizarre enough, the principal learnt of the incident when the state health minister called him up from Shimla and told him of the incident on March 8 at around 3.30 pm.
Aman Kachroo and his friends did not lodge any complaint on March 7 after the ragging. Aman went to an ENT specialist to complain of some discomfort in his left ear. Dr Harjeet Paul Singh, the ENT expert, informed the court that he had not noticed bleeding on examining the deceased. There was a perforation in the left ear, Dr Singh said, but it was at the “healing stage”, which, he deposed, develops two to three weeks after sustaining the injury. In other words, the perforation could not have been caused during ragging.
While the post-mortem report concluded that Aman died of “neurogenic shock due to ante-mortem head injuries” and “subarchanoid haemorrhage”, Dr DP Swami deposed that no external injury was found on his head. The defence lawyer pointed out that nothing on record showed that the deceased experienced symptoms like headache, nausea, giddiness and vomiting. Indeed, there were some fresh injuries on the body, which were recorded in the inquest that pointed to a ‘second ragging’ that might have caused Aman’s death.
The court, however, went by the expert opinion of Dr Swami -- it was not necessary for all cases of ‘subarchanoid haemorrhage’ to experience symptoms and that the patient could remain normal for 36 to 40 hours after receiving the injury. The court also dismissed the “fresh injuries” and said there was no evidence of a “second ragging” and the prosecution witnesses had mentioned it by mistake.
The prosecution failed to explain how only four boys could have intimidated, confined, abused and assaulted 22 first year students. It failed to explain how Aman Kachroo could have attended classes on March 7 and 8 and gone to the ENT Department on March 7 on his own, without complaining of any severe discomfort. Why did the ENT expert not notice any sign of internal or severe injury?
On March 8, at around 4 pm, the hostel manager met the first year students to inquire about the episode and persuaded them to file a written complaint. Aman Kachroo, in his own handwriting, wrote out the complaint and named the four accused. Around 6 pm, he went out of the room and spoke on his mobile for 10 or 15 minutes. After he returned, he complained of uneasiness, lay down on the floor and lost consciousness. His eyes were apparently bulging out.
But when he was taken to the Emergency and transferred to the ICU, doctors recorded that he had been brought with “sudden discomfort in the chest” and began treating him for a heart ailment. By 7.20 pm, Aman Kachroo was declared dead. It has been a sad and shoddy investigation and trial, which does justice to nobody. The “sentence” is most likely to be challenged and the accused may well succeed to get the benefit of doubt and even more lenient punishment.
Dharamsala, November 12
